D&D 5E I want a return to long duration spells in D&D Next.

[billd91]

I'm sorry, I can't meaningfully argue with "Round 60."

What game are you playing that has 60 combat rounds? Use realistic examples, please.

I had one that was probably not far from that range. It was well over 30. D&D 3.5, conversion of G1. One encounter morphed into a running battle with waves of giants, dire wolves, ogres, and a variety of other critters.

 

[billd91]

Having a mess of different bluffs/spell durations to keep track off all game is a PITA. The players don't bother and it takes away from the fun if I try and make them. Sure 4e had problems in combat with tracking all of it, but with 3e spell durations it was all the time.

I'm not against longer spell durations, but keep the system streamlined and intuitive.

Isn't that kind of self-regulating? If the players don't want to track the durations, they won't load up the buffs.

That said, I'm not opposed to streamlining. 3.5 could have stood a bit more reduction in bonus types to prevent stacking of effects.

 

[triqui]

In 3rd edition, buffs almost always came from spells while in 4th edition you had them in everything, even down to where you move. 4th edition holds the title for "all the time" modifiers.

Most 4e buffs last "until end of your next turn". It's in 3e where you had them all the time (in 3.5 the durations are nerfed, though).

4e problem was there were too much different modifiers, and you needed a lot of re-calculation because they lasted just a few rounds, so you couldn't have them added to your PC sheet (in 3e, you can have your attack and damage shown in your PC sheet including your friend Bull's Strength and Greater Magic Weapon, as they are active in every single combat you have during the day

 

[Ranes]

I want PCs to be able to cast long-lasting or event permanent spells, as long as they have survived long enough to reach a level that enables them. I'm fine with restrictions on this, including several suggested here already; concentration limits on spells maintained, stacking limits on the target and higher spell slots for duration doubling, to name a few. All good.

But I don't care much for 'encounter' as a definition of duration. It's too vague and variable for my tastes. And I know plenty of players who will argue for 'encounter' meaning one thing when it's to their advantage and another thing when it isn't. Or they'll compare two encounters of different lengths and point to some perceived unfairness, between the amount of trouble they were able to cause in one encounter compared to how the same effect caused them so much more trouble in another.

Keeping track of a bazillion and one things has always been a part of the game to me. I'm good at it and I don't mind it. It's part of being a good DM.

 

[Trance-Zg]

durations should be:

1round(wraith strike, critical strike...more or less any thing that will buff up next action you make this round)

10rounds + 1round/level(improved invisibility, displacement, summon monster, vigor...)

10mins + 1 min/level(invisibility, fly, bulls strength, mirror image...)

1hr + 10min/level(climb, alter self, )

24hrs(darkvision, mage armor, shield, longstrider, endure elements, mount, leomund's shacks, houses, caves, lorry vans ets.)



also, there could be a limit placed on the number of active magic buffs that could be placed on a character

something like 1 + 1 per constitution bonus.

 

[Garthanos]

Martial needs longer duration effects.

Only rituals should be permanent a long casting time and permanent price for a long duration benefit sounds fair

But... spell casters get there large area effects, martial effects should be virtually permanent.

I can remove an enemies eye with the hook of my weapon penalized there ranged attacks forever.

I can hamstring somebody that's right bipeds fall and everybody slowed ... how long does that last?

A spear blow to the head can result in a change of personality... ie alignment change.... no not for ten minutes,

Martial needs an advantage most of its effects against npcs at minimum need to be permanent, dont you think?

 

[Garthanos]

I can't live in a world without permanent magic mouth spells.

I think lasting indefinitely, ie till they say what is desired under the conditions you define is quite long enough.

 

[Trance-Zg]

I'm sorry, I can't meaningfully argue with "Round 60."

What game are you playing that has 60 combat rounds? Use realistic examples, please.

I remember one campaing, I think we were level 3(3.5e) and were pressed hard in a dungeon by dozens of kobolds.

The fight took atleast 100 rounds(was about 2-3hrs real time spend)

 

[Incenjucar]

I remember one campaing, I think we were level 3(3.5e) and were pressed hard in a dungeon by dozens of kobolds.

The fight took atleast 100 rounds(was about 2-3hrs real time spend)

That sounds borderline unhealthy and is not a realistic play time. In 4E the number of rounds you'll run into is about 4-6. 10 rounds and we're likely talking End Game Boss Fight.

 

[ForeverSlayer]

That sounds borderline unhealthy and is not a realistic play time. In 4E the number of rounds you'll run into is about 4-6. 10 rounds and we're likely talking End Game Boss Fight.

Not sure what you mean by unhealthy. Never knew there was an "unhealthiness" to the game.

Dice rolls can affect a battle, so can tactics. Each side could keep turning into a stalemate on each round. Also, healing can come into play on both sides of the battle. I love long and exciting battles better than I do short and dull ones.